Page 324 - 20818_park-B_efi
P. 324

revenge on the physician’s assets, the physician is exempt from noti-           many poor people are not decent and honest. Perhaps one does not
               fying the authorities, since for mitzvos that involve chessed the prin-         receive the reward for the mitzvah of charity given to these imposters,
               ciple of “Yours takes precedence” applies. However, the physician is            but only the reward of one’s good intention. In any event, even if only
               obligated to seriously weigh whether the possibility of his suffering a         a small minority are truly needy, the reward is substantial. Therefore,
               loss is clear and obvious.  However, if the patient’s vision is extremely       Yitzchak Avinu, who gave much charity, had great success in his pro-
               limited and he poses an absolute danger if he drives (6/30) then the            duce - one hundredfold.
               physician must disregard the danger to his own assets and notify the               It says in the introduction to the Sefer Be’er Avraham that Rav
               authorities. This is a case where the patient is liable to kill people, and     Avraham Avli Passveller would hand out letters of recommendations
               we are warned “Do not stand idly by the blood of your fellowman.”               to poor people who used to go begging from door to door, so that
                                                                                               they be supported generously. It happened more than once that one
                   1     SuMMaRy and Conclusions                                               of these so-called poor people was revealed as a drunkard or a thief,
                                                                                               but the great Be’er Avraham always found an excuse to justify them.
                  1.  The authorities’ stipulations for a driver’s license often go be-           It is also related in the sefer that one beggar had the recommenda-
                    yond what is called for, in order to be absolutely certain that a          tion of Rav Avli, which stated that “he poured water on his hands,”
                    driver will not endanger the public. Thus, although the author-            an expression which implies that he served the Torah scholar and
                    ities would revoke a driver’s license, there is clearly only a very        learned from him. It is used in reference to Elisha ben Shafat, who
                    remote chance of danger posed by a driver whose vision is less             “poured water” on the hands of the Prophet Eliyahu (Melachim II
                    than 6/12. Therefore if the physician looks away and does not              3:11). People were impressed by the letter and supported him gener-
                    report the deficiency, he does not violate “You shall not stand            ously. Afterwards, they discovered that he did not know how to read
                    idly by the blood of your fellowman.”                                      or write. They sought out Rav Avli, who explained that he hadn’t lied.
                  2.  Nonetheless, it seems that the correct thing to do would be to           The man had worked in his home for many years and had literally
                    report the deficiency, since the public has the right to grant a           poured water on his hands when necessary…
                    driver’s license only to those with excellent vision. Therefore,              We learn from the above that one can look away from an imposter,
                    this driver’s livelihood is contrary to the halachah. The Torah            especially nowadays when people are aware that many beggars are
                    view would advise him to resort to begging from door to door               imposters, and although there is no mitzvah to give charity to deceiv-
                    rather than driving, which, in his case, is comparable to murder.          ers, one receives the reward for intending to do the mitzvah of giving
                                                                                               charity. Therefore, in our case the physician is not required to expose
                  3.  In such cases, the physician should not decide alone but seek
                    out the opinion of his colleagues.                                         the imposter.
                                                                                                  On this topic we should note what the Chasam Sofer (Chullin 131,
                  4. If the physician knows that if he reports the visual limitation the       s.v. shaani) writes. If one separates tithes from his money and loses
                    patient will seek revenge financially, he can refrain from report-         what he separated, he is obligated to give the lost amount to charity
                    ing, because “your life takes precedence over his.” However if the         out of pocket. It is possible that this would also apply if one gave his
                    driver’s vision is 6/30, the physician is not allowed to ignore the        tithes to a poor man who turned out to be an imposter.
                    matter, despite the financial risk involved, since the Torah says
                    “Do not stand idly by the blood of your fellowman.”                                                   




        318              1  Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein                       Patient malingering  2                                          343                                                                                #                                                                                    20818




























































                                                                                      11
   319   320   321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329